The Hard Problem of Consciousness and Ananda

The hard problem of consciousness is supposed to be about our own personal feeling of the world. This is as far as I, or anybody, understands it, that peculiar cast that the generic experience of red for example has. Yes but isn’t that problem a subsection of the main problem of how the cerebral events translate into an experience of red as such? Talking about neural correlates has embedded in it the assumption that we know that this neuronal traffic ‘is’ red. This is what Stephen Earle Robbins calls the coding problem.
cf:coding
Three dots represents S in Morse code. This is the convention. How do we know ‘red’ before we know it. It’s an unknowable convention so to speak.

Are Plato’s forms and the substantial forms of Aristotle an attempted solution to the problem of conscious experience? The upadhis (limiting adjuncts) are proposed by Advaita. If we knew what consciousness was such that experience is possible would that bring an alteration to experience as such? Shankara says no and insists that it is a matter of insight. Would, however, the cast of general experience alter and the hard problem now be the source of ananda (bliss)?

some reviews

I see that the Notre Dame sans Merci Philosophical Reviews has a review of Vladimir Jankélévitch’s Henri Bergson:Duke University Press
Reviewed by Nicolas de Warren, Husserl Archive, KU Leuven
2016.08.09.
review
It became hard to read almost immediately and fulfilled its promise by being left unread not very far down the page. The hermeneutical contortions of the continental style book is to blame perhaps.

Michael Dirda should know better than to let a ‘heart rending’ escape him. His defence of Kipling against the shunners of evil views holds the short story Beyond the Pale to be such.
dirda
I rend my threadbare kurta, I foam and gnash. That story must be on some course or other. I regularly get visitations out of the night of Google. Put Kipling in the search bar.

I continue to read on every wet day here. War and Peace twice. I have been lingering over a consideration of Part V of Crime and Punishment by the master of skandaly or making scenes. ‘Don’t make a scene darling’, You know in the shop when we draw near to someone giving themselves over to the ecstasy of outrage, anger and ‘I want to see someone in charge’. The deep horror of Mrs. Marmeledov’s successive concussions by fate and Fydor saying to us - well if you can’t cry at least have a laugh.

Dr. Stephen E. Robbins
robbins
follows the true Bergsonian path of reflection founded on his expertise in psychology and memory theory. He does not flinch from consideration of the kernel question: if memory is not stored in the brain, where does it abide? If abide is the wrong way to look at it must we consider that memory is a recreation by a holographic wave built on the scaffolding of continuities that he calls ‘invarients’. I must read up on holography, Robbins’s guiding analogy. Is life long enough?

It’s nearly 10 and a nice day. The garden. I’m off to the carrots and the delicate pluck of finger hoeing.

I